The Shaykh—may Allah have mercy on him—was asked:

A man married a virgin and discovered that she suffered from continuous non-menstrual bleeding, which had persisted since she was in her mother’s home, and that her family had deceived him. Does he have the right to annul the marriage and recover the bridal dower from whoever deceived him? Must her mother and father swear an oath if they deny this? And may he have intercourse with her?

He replied:

This is a defect that establishes the right to annul the marriage, according to the stronger of the two opinions within the school of Ahmad and among others, for two reasons:

First, intercourse in this condition necessarily entails harm that he fears and discomfort that he experiences.

Second, according to the well-known position reported from Ahmad, intercourse with a woman experiencing non-menstrual bleeding is impermissible except out of necessity.

Whatever prevents intercourse physically, such as an obstruction of the vaginal passage, or through natural aversion, such as insanity or leprosy, establishes the right to annulment according to Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī and Ahmad, as has also been reported from ʿUmar.

As for conditions that prevent intercourse from being fully enjoyed, such as impurity in the vagina, there is a well-known disagreement concerning them. The condition of a woman suffering from non-menstrual bleeding is more severe than other such conditions.

If the marriage is annulled before consummation, he owes no bridal dower. If it is annulled afterwards, one opinion holds that seclusion of this kind makes the bridal dower fully due. If he has had intercourse with her, he may recover the dower from whoever deceived him.

Another opinion holds that the dower does not become fully due, so he owes nothing. He may require anyone whom he accuses of deceiving him to swear that they did not deceive him.

There is a well-known disagreement concerning intercourse with a woman experiencing non-menstrual bleeding. One view permits intercourse with her, as held by